Intriguing developments

Discuss anything ZDoom-related that doesn't fall into one of the other categories.
User avatar
Phobus
Posts: 5984
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 10:56 am
Location: London

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Phobus »

Excellent - an age old dream realised. This does of course mean that they will take a lot more processing with the new trees to traverse, but in limited use, it'll be very good!
User avatar
NeuralStunner
 
 
Posts: 12323
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:04 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: capital N, capital S, no space

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by NeuralStunner »

Phobus wrote:This does of course mean that they will take a lot more processing with the new trees to traverse, but in limited use, it'll be very good!
This brings up another thought: As a consideration to those with lower-end systems, would it be possible to include a CVar to disable the dynamic segs? As it wouldn't be of any benefit to them for polyobjects that didn't cause any trouble before. (Presumably, anyone with that bare a syastem couldn't be playing any overly complex mods in the first place.)

I guess the new code may be too far integrated at this point, and that may be a "no".
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
Posts: 7746
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 10:30 pm

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by randi »

I think you overestimate the amount of time needed for such a minimal node building.
User avatar
Zippy
Posts: 3302
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:31 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Zippy »

Considering building all the nodes fresh for huge maps is usually pretty dang quick to begin with, it wouldn't surprise me that intelligent, dynamic node building is minimal enough to not add much excess processing. As long as it's not polynuts.wad or whatever...

... actually, would that even be that bad? The map doesn't have a lot of nodes to begin with...
Gez
 
 
Posts: 17831
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:22 pm

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Gez »

Unless it has been changed for UDMF, there's still a hard limit of 256 polyobjects per map, isn't there? Since it's the angle value that's used to enumerate them, and it's a value between 0 and 255... A PolyNuts.wad map would have to contain 10617 polyobjects to be worthy of the name. :P
User avatar
NeuralStunner
 
 
Posts: 12323
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:04 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: capital N, capital S, no space

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by NeuralStunner »

randy wrote:I think you overestimate the amount of time needed for such a minimal node building.
Probably. :biggrin:
Gez wrote:Since it's the angle value that's used to enumerate them, and it's a value between 0 and 255...
I thought the Angle property ranged from 0-359? In UDMF at least, "angle=90;" results in a north-facing Thing.
Gez
 
 
Posts: 17831
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:22 pm

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Gez »

It uses [wiki]byte angle[/wiki] values...
User avatar
NeuralStunner
 
 
Posts: 12323
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:04 pm
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: capital N, capital S, no space

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by NeuralStunner »

Is the real angle just converted to a byte later, then? :?
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
Posts: 7746
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 10:30 pm

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by randi »

No, it's regular degrees. The angle field of a map thing is two bytes to accommodate that.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
Posts: 7746
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 10:30 pm

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by randi »

Since the BSP-ed polyobjects are in trunk, here's the map I used to test with if you want to try them out quickly. (It's for Hexen.) Hitting +use anywhere will start and stop the polyobject motion.

Edit: Get the updated version of the map from the news post.
User avatar
Demolisher
Posts: 1749
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:59 pm
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: Winchester, VA

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Demolisher »

Out of curiosity, what is the garbled mess next to the polyobjects?
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
Posts: 7746
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 10:30 pm

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by randi »

You mean the polyobject behind you?

Also, if you aren't compiling your own binaries, this is only available starting with revision 2480. If you're using something older, it won't look right.
User avatar
Kinsie
Posts: 7399
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 9:22 am
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support
Location: MAP33

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Kinsie »

zuzma wrote:Oh hay guiz
Image

Damn 3D floors in software look awesome! :D
Are these built the same way as GZ's floors?
zuzma
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 10:28 am

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by zuzma »

Yup, it's the same as GZDoom.
User avatar
Hirogen2
Posts: 2033
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 6:15 am
Graphics Processor: Intel with Vulkan/Metal Support
Location: Central Germany

Re: Intriguing developments

Post by Hirogen2 »

The Ultimate DooMer wrote:2-sided polyobjects already exist, you just can't jump on them while they're moving (or you get thrown off :p)
Not necessarily. kzdoom5.wad (or was it 4 or 6?) has 2-sided PO ceiling "fans" in the start area (with STEP1 texture IIRC). Usually you can step right in (not on), and nothing happens. Given the right angle, the player is nudged a bit, though still not completely thrown off.

Return to “General”